Moellentine_Lorine_1.2 Reading

Between all of the readings there was a debate on how accessible data should be for the public and researchers and whether the public’s data can be used for research. Data dimension: accessing urban data and making it accessible highlights “The Trash Track Project” which involved both MIT researchers and volunteers from the public helped connect to two social groups for further development of the project. The link between the two is something rarely seen as much research done in the public sphere is undetected by people. With the issue of transparency and privacy, it is likely that people would dislike their information being used for research as it is a breach of their personal lives. However, within the “The Borderline project”, it was clear that communication between regions was significantly different than actual state and regional boundaries.

I think the bigger question becomes why do this research without using it to improve social networking and political boundaries? Perhaps that goes into murky waters as researchers can present their information rather than enforcing change. With that being said, making analysis like these can bring about social tendencies that could help improve built infrastructure and finding ways to apply this research into the public realm would be a step further worth taking.

With the latter readings from Food, Time & Space, SOCIAL “CODING:” URBAN PROCESSES AND SOCIO-COMPUTATIONAL WORKFLOW and Using parametric methods to understand place in urban design courses, it was interesting to see the techniques being applied to not only a variety of locations in the world, but also teaching students the research methods needed to do independent analysis. Keeping in mind the scales at which one chooses to research is important and is dependent on the city and location as the infrastructure may not be in place for diverse surveying.

Most of the data being collected involved aspects of social networking, however in doing so it is possible that a group of people who do not use that technology could have been missed i.e. older communities, impoverished groups and rural populations. Without involving a huge interview process going door to door, it is likely that most data collected no matter what will be lacking in some groups. Acknowledging these gaps and trying to fill them is critical in getting comprehensive results.